OMG - local ref gets sued on People's Court

[Mark Padgett]

I almost fell off my chair during lunch today when a case came on People's Court involving two local officials. One was suing the other for not paying him for working some games last summer. The ref being sued (uh, let's just call him Skip - no, he's not Skippy Weaselpants) contracted with a coach to provide officials for a local kids summer league. Apparently, there are two coaches who run this league and the other coach had already contacted a few officials to work some of the games. It gets a quite confusing at this point. Skip assigned a guy to work some games with him, but this other ref (who had been assigned the games by the coach) also showed up. According to him, Skip told him to go ahead and work the games and Skip would pay him. They went ahead and worked the games together.

Skip's defense was that the money paid to him to distribute did not include money for the refs who were assigned by the coach. However, the judge concluded that Skip received that amount of money in the check cut to him by the "non-assigning" coach and he should have paid this ref. There was a copy of a letter from that coach to that effect which was presented as evidence by the ref who was suing.

The judge also really got on Skip's case and practically called him a thief for withholding the money.

Man, I gotta tell ya' - it was really weird seeing these guys on that show. I've known Skip for years and have worked quite a few games with him. I don't know the other guy well, but I think I may have worked with him a little a few years ago. Maybe not. I can't remember everyone.

[representing]

I saw something a year or two ago regarding a ref or a coach on one of those TV shows. A player was complaining about something (got hurt because of a no call maybe?) so the parent sued the coach or the referee for it. If I remember correctly, it was thrown out within 30 seconds. Very short court session.

Sorry I couldn't provide details, I just remember seeing something like this regarding a referee. I'm pretty sure it was a referee and honestly, the parent probably just wanted to get on TV for this, not caring too much about the referee and stuff. If anyone else can remember this, do you remember the details?

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I almost fell off my chair during lunch today when a case came on People's Court involving two local officials. One was suing the other for not paying him for working some games last summer. The ref being sued (uh, let's just call him Skip - no, he's not Skippy Weaselpants) contracted with a coach to provide officials for a local kids summer league. Apparently, there are two coaches who run this league and the other coach had already contacted a few officials to work some of the games. It gets a quite confusing at this point. Skip assigned a guy to work some games with him, but this other ref (who had been assigned the games by the coach) also showed up. According to him, Skip told him to go ahead and work the games and Skip would pay him. They went ahead and worked the games together.

Skip's defense was that the money paid to him to distribute did not include money for the refs who were assigned by the coach. However, the judge concluded that Skip received that amount of money in the check cut to him by the "non-assigning" coach and he should have paid this ref. There was a copy of a letter from that coach to that effect which was presented as evidence by the ref who was suing.

The judge also really got on Skip's case and practically called him a thief for withholding the money.

Man, I gotta tell ya' - it was really weird seeing these guys on that show. I've known Skip for years and have worked quite a few games with him. I don't know the other guy well, but I think I may have worked with him a little a few years ago. Maybe not. I can't remember everyone.

Mark e-mail me details. I want NAMES!!

[abarksdale]

The funny thing is both parties get like $3000 for appearing on the show.

[JRutledge]

Funny I saw a local official on Judge Mathis, but it was not for an officiating issue. It was about him owing money to a "girlfriend."

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by abarksdale

The funny thing is both parties get like $3000 for appearing on the show.

I'm not sure, but I think that might be a pot of $$$. So $6,000 altogether with $5000 the jurisdictional limit. Say Plaintiff wins full amount of $5000, then the 2 parties would split the remaining $1000. Plaintiff goes home with $5,500 and defendant still walks away with $500.

If the plaintiff loses, then yes, they each go home with $3000.

[26 Year Gap]

And in this case, both come away with a sterling reputation. If Skip had any smarts, he'd have paid the guy for his work and been done with it.

[Mark Padgett]

Just found out I have two games next week with the guy who got sued. I'm just glad he's not responsible for paying me.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Just found out I have two games next week with the guy who got sued. I'm just glad he's not responsible for paying me.

I can imagine all of the one liners floating around your medicine bottle now.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

I can imagine all of the one liners floating around your medicine bottle now.

Yeah - I was thinking of telling him I saw him on TV - on "Biggest Loser".

[BigT]

Todd's webmail to NFHS

Topic:NFHS Officials Association
Comments:I know I have some liability coverage as a referee due to my dues. If a recreation center forces me to allow a kid to play with a steel brace and said player hurts another to require medical attention and incur medical bills will my liability coverage help me or because I have not followed the rule book am I on my own?

Response...

Mr. Thurston,



I contacted our insurance company, Dissinger Reed and below is their response:



The liability policy only pays sums he is legally obligated to pay in a court of law.

If he is sued, it pays monetary damages.

So if this was to end up in a court of law, and a judge or jury found him negligent and responsible for the medical expenses, then yes it would cover him.



If you have any further questions you can reach Dissinger Reed at...

Anyone else blown away by this response and coverage?

[BigT]

Originally Posted by BigT

Todd's webmail to NFHS

Topic:NFHS Officials Association
Comments:I know I have some liability coverage as a referee due to my dues. If a recreation center forces me to allow a kid to play with a steel brace and said player hurts another to require medical attention and incur medical bills will my liability coverage help me or because I have not followed the rule book am I on my own?

Response...

Mr. Thurston,



I contacted our insurance company, Dissinger Reed and below is their response:



The liability policy only pays sums he is legally obligated to pay in a court of law.

If he is sued, it pays monetary damages.

So if this was to end up in a court of law, and a judge or jury found him negligent and responsible for the medical expenses, then yes it would cover him.



If you have any further questions you can reach Dissinger Reed at...

Anyone else blown away by this response and coverage?

I replied...

This makes no sense to me. The rule book says it is illegal to let a player play basketball with a steel brace. If I ignore that rule and the kid hurts someone and I am sued you will pay for all my legal bills and pay the damages from the suit?

The reply..

I’m not asking you to ignore the rule, I thought you were asking a worst case scenario, if you were “forced” as you put it, to allow an athlete play with a steel brace and someone was injured. You would be covered.

....

This seems crazy to me.

[BigT]

Officials Legal Liability

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by BigT

I’m not asking you to ignore the rule, I thought you were asking a worst case scenario, if you were “forced” as you put it, to allow an athlete play with a steel brace and someone was injured. You would be covered.

As was stated previously, you can't be "forced" if you walk away.

[MD Longhorn]

What the heck do the last 3 posts have to do with the 3 year old thread you appended it to?